I've been so busy that I didn't even notice. I got an email from Carlos over at Ansca Mobile to congratulate me. BOT is New and Noteworthy for both Adventure and Role Playing.
UtopianGames said: Regarding the controls...what about instead of a stick use a circular control like in our breakout template then you can have 360.
What I'm planning kinda works like that, as I'm not planning to change the speed of movement. It's not analogue thumbstick. (The animation doesn't have an expression editor for frames.) Yet, it's not a dial. It's a circle, with a pulsing particles for position. That's the theory anyway. I'm still fighting with the interface. The gold bar (and the digits) should move out of the way when the type-2 controls are being used.
Photics said: I'm almost done with the control system. I'm basically trying to make it do three things...
Original Thumbstick Mac Desktop compatible.
I'm getting lost in my own logic. Some of this "code" I haven't looked at in months. HA.
That happens to me all the time.. I always try to name anything explanatory but little after, while trying few rules at once I don't name any of them (saying myself "will name it after seeing which one works"). And after some time, I find myself in a bunch of "Rules".
Funny, the comment lines for EVERYTHING was the first thing they thought me at school...
Nah, it has its own fun figuring your game out, right?
" Should your game be easy or hard? Apparently, easy seems better for sales. HA HA "
I think you're shooting yourself in the foot by thinking like this.
If your game being challenging for good reasons is good, especially if you have pick it back up and try again sort of thing going on.
If your game is hard because people can't control it, that's not good for casual or "hardcore" players. No one wants a game that you die because you can't get your player to do what you intend, or because when you tried to do what you intended your player did something.
You absolutely can not blame the "hardcore vs. casual gamer" thing on flawed design decisions in this game. It quite simply just does not fit in to the discussion at all, and is functioning as a scapegoat.
Hard doesn't automatically = good for hardcore. Easy doesn't automatically = good for casual.
Metronome: Very well said. Controls do not dictate difficulty levels in games . They should be intuitive, not frustrating.
Same thing for lack of health drops, and save points in the game. If the premise for the game is exploration, collecting, and upgrading weapons, then you should have save points, and health drops in games. All RPG's have this.
From what I can hear, Photics is updating BOT with health drops and control fixes, so hopefully it will make it a more fun game to play.
When I'm exploring, (and I've played many, many RPG's), it's natural to expect, even for a hardcore gamer, to see a save spot, health replenishing spot, or something. This is a design flaw, and it's hindering what I feel, is the premise of the game.
cbt said: Funny, the comment lines for EVERYTHING was the first thing they thought me at school...
Good commenting would help, but it's more than that. I'm getting lost in the "code" because there's just so much of it. When I open the "TANK" actor, the GameSalad Creator has to think for a while... AND THEN it properly adjusts the scroll bar.
Plus, not since Egyptian times has the world seen so many pyramids. Heh... that's a joke, but it certainly feels that way. I have rules, within rules, within rules... with even more rules! The behaviors get squished so it's not so easy to work.
Metronome49 said: I think you're shooting yourself in the foot by thinking like this.
Obviously the controls should work well. That's not what I mean. It seems that the health addition is going to be greatly welcomed by the players, but that does make the game a lot easier.
Is it realistic to punch a garbage can, find a roasted turkey, eat it and get full health? No... you'd likely get food poisoning and probably die.
BOT was created with some realism. Just because I kill a bug on the street doesn't mean I should get full health. So, there was danger in wandering too far from home. I think two generations ago, players would keep playing until they figured it out. Now, players don't have the patience.
The feedback for this game is a bit bizarre to me. It was like I killed someone's puppy. I didn't think the game was that hard. I thought the controls were great.
I know why big game developers don't stray from the norm. It's too risky. Yet, as an independent developer, I thought that I could try some new things... like a new control scheme or a more challenging adventure. Nope, so 1.1 should have health drops, a jetpack and a thumbstick.
Although, in a sense, I should feel honored. I don't think anyone in this community has seen critiques such as these. Usually it's like, "Nice game dude."
@ Photics .... just wanted to add two cents from a casual gamer. Certainly is not my type of game, but I purchased to support 'one of our own' and I wanted to let you know I am greatly impressed with the quality and detail.
I have had troubles with getting BOT aligned to kill the wasps and have died quite a few times. So I would definetely benefit from a bit better control. I however like the touch to move elements and the general responsiveness. I think if I could fight a little more accurately them the health wouldn't be so important to save. IE: I think I could fight my way to getting gold and back again.
Again not a seasoned player so really just showing some appreciation and support. Could I suggest however that if you do a movement mechanic change that you pick a willing and experienced member or two and give them an ad hoc to give further feedback? I think this could be big and think you could improve better with someone other than yourself helping your direction.
Good job and good luck .. I look forward to the upgrade.
simo103 said: Could I suggest however that if you do a movement mechanic change that you pick a willing and experienced member or two and give them an ad hoc to give further feedback? I think this could be big and think you could improve better
All this could have been figured out before you even released if only you had some beta tester. I could never imagin releaseing a game lieke this without some testers, seems mad to me
as I said eairly 152 rank in only beacuse of release and icon that was temporary boost and its out from adventure 200. And even new and nothworry there is no boost sale so all you have to release next update asap.
creativeapps said: as I said eairly 152 rank in only beacuse of release and icon that was temporary boost and its out from adventure 200. And even new and nothworry there is no boost sale so all you have to release next update asap.
I don't think the update is really going to matter. The game is sliding away... probably never to return.
Even if the controls were loved by all, I don't think it would make that big of a difference. The reviews on the app listing are good.
Still... I'm working on the update and maybe I'll launch this game in the Mac App Store.
Photics said: I know why big game developers don't stray from the norm. It's too risky. Yet, as an independent developer, I thought that I could try some new things... like a new control scheme or a more challenging adventure. Nope, so 1.1 should have health drops, a jetpack and a thumbstick.
You're missing the point here. No one here has said that trying new things is bad. I even applauded you in an earlier post for trying a new type of control scheme. But the simple fact is, backed up by basically everyone (not named Photics) who has played the game, is that the control scheme as implemented does not work well and causes undue frustration (and not a good kind of frustration either).
"The feedback for this game is a bit bizarre to me. It was like I killed someone's puppy. I didn't think the game was that hard. I thought the controls were great.
I know why big game developers don't stray from the norm. It's too risky. Yet, as an independent developer, I thought that I could try some new things... like a new control scheme or a more challenging adventure."
I think the feedback has been such because of the way that you've discussed your game for so long, and all the hyperbole you described it with. A lot of people have been anticipating it.
I think straying from the norm is risky, and I commend you for trying a new control system, but it didn't work. Not because it is different from the norm, but because it has design flaws. I really think you would've benefitted from some testers.
I am a gamer from two generations ago, and I think you have to pay attention to WHY your adventure is challenging.
Photics, the fact that you quoted "I thought the controls were great" is your issue right there. What about the rest of the players? Did they think the controls were great? I think the consensus is that the controls system is flawed so arguing "I thought it was great..." doesn't cut it. Hopefully this will get you to move away from this tunnel vision approach. The question becomes, are you making this game for you, or for the players? Having said this, I'm glad you've considered updating according to feedback but your attitude towards it seems less than receptive, and more forced.
Yes. I just can't help but feel like he's going, "Everyone would love this game if it wasn't for their deficiencies." Instead of realizing that it has big inherent design flaws and should have been play-tested more. Whether it's hard or easy or hardcore or casual.
Metronome49 said: I am a gamer from two generations ago, and I think you have to pay attention to WHY your adventure is challenging.
Two generations ago, there were games like Mortal Kombat. Their fatality system was hardly intuitive. Yet, players played to figure it out.
It seems like there are so many games out right now... so many easy games too... that if the player doesn't understand the game in like two minutes, they're going to move onto the next 99¢ game.
Does a game really need so much spoon feeding?
"Congratulations... you killed your first robo wasp. Here's a 30 minute 3D rendered cutscene."
butterbean said: The question becomes, are you making this game for you, or for the players?
I make games that I enjoy... otherwise, why do it? And if I like the game, maybe others will like it too. Yet, I think most people today play games like FarmVille, CityVille and Wii Sports. These are cutesy games, without a lot of the danger that exists in BOT.
I think that's what bothers me about the feedback. I haven't played a game like this in a long time... a game where I felt a rush of adrenaline... where dying was cause of concern... where skill and aim matters. Auto-Aim? I don't remember any retro games with Auto-Aim. Maybe homing missiles, but those were usually secondary weapons.
Here's a summary of the biggest gripes...
--Controls too hard --Too hard to start out --Dislike of loss of gold --Loss of direction, not sure where to go
Every one of those design elements was intentional. The game was supposed to be big. It's supposed to be hard to start out. Death in the game is supposed to have a penalty. As for the controls... one-touch combos... Shoot-shoot-stab! I don't see what the big problem is.
But hey... that's the feedback so I'm updating the game. Yeah, I'm not happy about updating my game because the game was intentionally made this way.
Posting this after 3-4 hours. For me, the game simply isn't engaging. It's not a matter of figuring out stuff, or take my time with it, it's just that it's not fun nor entertaining enough. Players will figure out stuff, if they think it's worth the hassle. I did with the first zelda and countless of other games. Man, I did it even with ET for nes d:, which was hardly engaging, but the "movie" kept me on it. With BOT, I had only the fact that "it is a very well made gamesalad app", and I wanted to try it. No story, not even an incipit (don't know if it's the right word in english d:) that was at least interesting, all the areas around were kinda anonymous (although I liked the art), with only spiders and wasps, not a treasure chest, nothing that gives the player a sense of "satisfaction", apart from killing always the same monsters. Ok, there are upgrades for Tank, but what's the purpose of achieving them? Maybe there is one, but the game doesn't give out the idea of "useful upgrades" apart from other weapons and stuff, like health. Hope I'm not sounding too harsh, it's always hard for me to come up with critics in english that doesn't sound harsh. It's the "me player" talking, not the dev (: . I really tried to like this game, and I do for some aspects. It's my genre, but it just feels pointless to play it. I have no fun, I have no reason to explore, I have no sense of satisfaction. Probably a good beta testing would have pointed this out. But, as a gamesalad game, at least technically, it really is very good (: The update seems to solve most of the "frustrating" bits for appstore audience, but I'd love to see a sequel or another take of yours on this genre with more "meat" on it (although I can only imagine how big the project is in gamesalad).
Photics said: It seems like there are so many games out right now... so many easy games too... that if the player doesn't understand the game in like two minutes, they're going to move onto the next 99¢ game.
Exactly. And that's exactly the demographic you're hitting with 99¢ games. I'm a pretty hardcore gamer myself. I play games like Masse Effect 2 on Insanity just so I can say I did it. I love hard games. But in the iPhone game demographic, it's not the most lucrative option. Most people who play iPhone games don't have the time to learn a game which has a harder learning curve. But there are days when I drain my iPhone battery within a couple hours from figuring out some harder games while waiting for my wife to pick out a purse at the mall. I applaud you for creating a game you yourself would love to play. I may download it to try it out myself.
But the game I'm building right now, I'm pretty much selling out with a cute look and gameplay that I figure will appeal to the largest audience. And I figure that if I make the game too hard, I'll most likely not get the word of mouth crowd to jump on board.
Photics: It's clear I'm not getting anywhere with you, and we would just argue in circles. To me it's so painfully obvious, that I can't fathom why you don't see the difference.
Let me clarify what I mean by the controls. They aren't "Hard", they aren't challenging, and there is no learning curve to them. They are flawed, and they don't work. Plain and simple.
If you don't understand that key difference between what's "challenging" and what's "broken" then my feedback here is pointless.
I truly love the premise of your game, but what's keeping me, and everyone else that owns a copy of the game from playing it is the flawed, and broken controls.
As for the rest of the game, gameplay, powerups, health etc is all debatable.
You cannot argue that the controls implemented in your game work, because they simply don't.
The sad thing about this whole thing is you clearly have the talent to make an amazing game but you're so unbelievably unreceptive to ANY constructive criticism, and will defend this until the end.
Even when you post about doing updates, there's a reluctance tone to your voice.
I don't know what else to say to you except good luck, and maybe one day you'll see it.... or not....
butterbean said: Let me clarify what I mean by the controls. They aren't "Hard", they aren't challenging, and there is no learning curve to them. They are flawed, and they don't work. Plain and simple.
Broken controls?!
Street Fighter II... now those are broken controls - literally. Sometimes you'd get stuck on the side without a working fierce punch button. Or even worse, sometimes the controller wouldn't move left. And yet... PEOPLE STILL PLAYED. Even knowing the controller didn't move left or have a fierce punch, there were still players willing to play.
Now those were broken controls!
Unless the game has a simple swiping motion like Angry Bird, Fruit Ninja or Cut The Rope, the controls are usually tough. I won't buy any of Sega's retro games because I hate onscreen controllers. Sometimes I wonder how much more fun this would be if iOS devices had a dedicated analogue stick and buttons. For years I didn't want an iPhone because it lacked a physical keyboard.
Simple controls... cutesy theme... easy gameplay... I think that's what makes sense on iOS.
I heard a company was making a physical joystick for the iphone, I'm actually very surprised it hasn't come out yet. If there was one, we'd more than likely have no argument.
No platformer, RPG, or complex game is "easy" to play or control with the iOS, but BOT was beyond a challenge, and it (the controls) was a detriment to the gameplay.
And I'm only saying this, because if I didn't give a damn about playing the game, I wouldn't be sitting here giving you my feedback.
butterbean said: And I'm only saying this, because if I didn't give a damn about playing the game, I wouldn't be sitting here giving you my feedback.
Well, maybe you'll like the new Thumbstick
I think it's harder than the original controls, but I'm obviously not in the majority
There is one clear bonus though... the sword hits don't need to be so precise. With a swoosh of the thumb, you can spin around a bit with the sword. When 1.1 is launched, it's a bad day to be a bug.
As for the physical controllers, I've seen some in the early stages, but they didn't seem to catch on. There's also suction-cup things to put a real thumbstick above a virtual one. That seems weird to me.
Comments
I hope you can get a couple of the smaller bits of feedback in and an update approved whilst the game is getting some Apple attention...
Good luck with sales.
Just an idea...
Darren.
Also, nice looking controller there.
Original
Thumbstick
Mac Desktop compatible.
I'm getting lost in my own logic. Some of this "code" I haven't looked at in months. HA.
Funny, the comment lines for EVERYTHING was the first thing they thought me at school...
Nah, it has its own fun figuring your game out, right?
" Should your game be easy or hard? Apparently, easy seems better for sales. HA HA
I think you're shooting yourself in the foot by thinking like this.
If your game being challenging for good reasons is good, especially if you have pick it back up and try again sort of thing going on.
If your game is hard because people can't control it, that's not good for casual or "hardcore" players. No one wants a game that you die because you can't get your player to do what you intend, or because when you tried to do what you intended your player did something.
You absolutely can not blame the "hardcore vs. casual gamer" thing on flawed design decisions in this game. It quite simply just does not fit in to the discussion at all, and is functioning as a scapegoat.
Hard doesn't automatically = good for hardcore. Easy doesn't automatically = good for casual.
Same thing for lack of health drops, and save points in the game. If the premise for the game is exploration, collecting, and upgrading weapons, then you should have save points, and health drops in games. All RPG's have this.
From what I can hear, Photics is updating BOT with health drops and control fixes, so hopefully it will make it a more fun game to play.
When I'm exploring, (and I've played many, many RPG's), it's natural to expect, even for a hardcore gamer, to see a save spot, health replenishing spot, or something. This is a design flaw, and it's hindering what I feel, is the premise of the game.
Plus, not since Egyptian times has the world seen so many pyramids. Heh... that's a joke, but it certainly feels that way. I have rules, within rules, within rules... with even more rules! The behaviors get squished so it's not so easy to work. Obviously the controls should work well. That's not what I mean. It seems that the health addition is going to be greatly welcomed by the players, but that does make the game a lot easier.
Is it realistic to punch a garbage can, find a roasted turkey, eat it and get full health? No... you'd likely get food poisoning and probably die.
BOT was created with some realism. Just because I kill a bug on the street doesn't mean I should get full health. So, there was danger in wandering too far from home. I think two generations ago, players would keep playing until they figured it out. Now, players don't have the patience.
The feedback for this game is a bit bizarre to me. It was like I killed someone's puppy. I didn't think the game was that hard. I thought the controls were great.
I know why big game developers don't stray from the norm. It's too risky. Yet, as an independent developer, I thought that I could try some new things... like a new control scheme or a more challenging adventure. Nope, so 1.1 should have health drops, a jetpack and a thumbstick.
Although, in a sense, I should feel honored. I don't think anyone in this community has seen critiques such as these. Usually it's like, "Nice game dude."
I have had troubles with getting BOT aligned to kill the wasps and have died quite a few times. So I would definetely benefit from a bit better control. I however like the touch to move elements and the general responsiveness. I think if I could fight a little more accurately them the health wouldn't be so important to save. IE: I think I could fight my way to getting gold and back again.
Again not a seasoned player so really just showing some appreciation and support. Could I suggest however that if you do a movement mechanic change that you pick a willing and experienced member or two and give them an ad hoc to give further feedback? I think this could be big and think you could improve better with someone other than yourself helping your direction.
Good job and good luck .. I look forward to the upgrade.
But looking forward to the update
The game is sliding away... probably never to return.
Even if the controls were loved by all, I don't think it would make that big of a difference. The reviews on the app listing are good.
Still... I'm working on the update and maybe I'll launch this game in the Mac App Store.
Darren.
- Jeff
I know why big game developers don't stray from the norm. It's too risky. Yet, as an independent developer, I thought that I could try some new things... like a new control scheme or a more challenging adventure."
I think the feedback has been such because of the way that you've discussed your game for so long, and all the hyperbole you described it with. A lot of people have been anticipating it.
I think straying from the norm is risky, and I commend you for trying a new control system, but it didn't work. Not because it is different from the norm, but because it has design flaws. I really think you would've benefitted from some testers.
I am a gamer from two generations ago, and I think you have to pay attention to WHY your adventure is challenging.
Hopefully this will get you to move away from this tunnel vision approach.
The question becomes, are you making this game for you, or for the players?
Having said this, I'm glad you've considered updating according to feedback but your attitude towards it seems less than receptive, and more forced.
Yes. I just can't help but feel like he's going, "Everyone would love this game if it wasn't for their deficiencies." Instead of realizing that it has big inherent design flaws and should have been play-tested more. Whether it's hard or easy or hardcore or casual.
It seems like there are so many games out right now... so many easy games too... that if the player doesn't understand the game in like two minutes, they're going to move onto the next 99¢ game.
Does a game really need so much spoon feeding?
"Congratulations... you killed your first robo wasp. Here's a 30 minute 3D rendered cutscene." I make games that I enjoy... otherwise, why do it? And if I like the game, maybe others will like it too. Yet, I think most people today play games like FarmVille, CityVille and Wii Sports. These are cutesy games, without a lot of the danger that exists in BOT.
I think that's what bothers me about the feedback. I haven't played a game like this in a long time... a game where I felt a rush of adrenaline... where dying was cause of concern... where skill and aim matters. Auto-Aim? I don't remember any retro games with Auto-Aim. Maybe homing missiles, but those were usually secondary weapons.
Here's a summary of the biggest gripes...
--Controls too hard
--Too hard to start out
--Dislike of loss of gold
--Loss of direction, not sure where to go
Every one of those design elements was intentional. The game was supposed to be big. It's supposed to be hard to start out. Death in the game is supposed to have a penalty. As for the controls... one-touch combos... Shoot-shoot-stab! I don't see what the big problem is.
But hey... that's the feedback so I'm updating the game. Yeah, I'm not happy about updating my game because the game was intentionally made this way.
For me, the game simply isn't engaging. It's not a matter of figuring out stuff, or take my time with it, it's just that it's not fun nor entertaining enough. Players will figure out stuff, if they think it's worth the hassle. I did with the first zelda and countless of other games. Man, I did it even with ET for nes d:, which was hardly engaging, but the "movie" kept me on it. With BOT, I had only the fact that "it is a very well made gamesalad app", and I wanted to try it. No story, not even an incipit (don't know if it's the right word in english d:) that was at least interesting, all the areas around were kinda anonymous (although I liked the art), with only spiders and wasps, not a treasure chest, nothing that gives the player a sense of "satisfaction", apart from killing always the same monsters. Ok, there are upgrades for Tank, but what's the purpose of achieving them? Maybe there is one, but the game doesn't give out the idea of "useful upgrades" apart from other weapons and stuff, like health.
Hope I'm not sounding too harsh, it's always hard for me to come up with critics in english that doesn't sound harsh. It's the "me player" talking, not the dev (: . I really tried to like this game, and I do for some aspects. It's my genre, but it just feels pointless to play it. I have no fun, I have no reason to explore, I have no sense of satisfaction. Probably a good beta testing would have pointed this out.
But, as a gamesalad game, at least technically, it really is very good (:
The update seems to solve most of the "frustrating" bits for appstore audience, but I'd love to see a sequel or another take of yours on this genre with more "meat" on it (although I can only imagine how big the project is in gamesalad).
But the game I'm building right now, I'm pretty much selling out with a cute look and gameplay that I figure will appeal to the largest audience. And I figure that if I make the game too hard, I'll most likely not get the word of mouth crowd to jump on board.
There are five upgrades for TANK, which unlocks the final Survivor area. People have stated that they have no desire to see this final area.
Yet, if you have all five upgrades, TANK is a killing machine - significantly improved defense offense and speed.
Let me clarify what I mean by the controls. They aren't "Hard", they aren't challenging, and there is no learning curve to them. They are flawed, and they don't work. Plain and simple.
If you don't understand that key difference between what's "challenging" and what's "broken" then my feedback here is pointless.
I truly love the premise of your game, but what's keeping me, and everyone else that owns a copy of the game from playing it is the flawed, and broken controls.
As for the rest of the game, gameplay, powerups, health etc is all debatable.
You cannot argue that the controls implemented in your game work, because they simply don't.
The sad thing about this whole thing is you clearly have the talent to make an amazing game but you're so unbelievably unreceptive to ANY constructive criticism, and will defend this until the end.
Even when you post about doing updates, there's a reluctance tone to your voice.
I don't know what else to say to you except good luck, and maybe one day you'll see it.... or not....
Street Fighter II... now those are broken controls - literally. Sometimes you'd get stuck on the side without a working fierce punch button. Or even worse, sometimes the controller wouldn't move left. And yet... PEOPLE STILL PLAYED. Even knowing the controller didn't move left or have a fierce punch, there were still players willing to play.
Now those were broken controls!
Unless the game has a simple swiping motion like Angry Bird, Fruit Ninja or Cut The Rope, the controls are usually tough. I won't buy any of Sega's retro games because I hate onscreen controllers. Sometimes I wonder how much more fun this would be if iOS devices had a dedicated analogue stick and buttons. For years I didn't want an iPhone because it lacked a physical keyboard.
Simple controls... cutesy theme... easy gameplay... I think that's what makes sense on iOS.
No platformer, RPG, or complex game is "easy" to play or control with the iOS, but BOT was beyond a challenge, and it (the controls) was a detriment to the gameplay.
And I'm only saying this, because if I didn't give a damn about playing the game, I wouldn't be sitting here giving you my feedback.
I think it's harder than the original controls, but I'm obviously not in the majority
There is one clear bonus though... the sword hits don't need to be so precise. With a swoosh of the thumb, you can spin around a bit with the sword. When 1.1 is launched, it's a bad day to be a bug.
As for the physical controllers, I've seen some in the early stages, but they didn't seem to catch on. There's also suction-cup things to put a real thumbstick above a virtual one. That seems weird to me.
EDIT- wow. fail
Hmmm suction cup thumbsticks? Now that is weird!